Ludwig van BEETHOVEN (1770-1827)
String Quartet in F minor, Opus 95 (1810-11) [18:18]
Franz SCHUBERT (1797-1828)
String Quartet in G major, D 887 (1826) [49:42]
Hagen Quartet
Recorded Salzburg Mozarteum December 1996 (Beethoven); Wiesloch, Minnesangensaal June 1997 and February 1998 (Schubert)
Presto on-demand CD
DEUTSCHE GRAMMOPHON 457 615-2 [68:10]
I have admired the Hagen Quartet for many years so my expectations were high. Their interpretations have always been both searching and individual, illuminating the music with imagination but without distortion. Another strong point is their recognition of each work's originality, avoiding any sense of routine.
They begin Beethoven's Opus 95 with tremendous fire and impetuosity. The main drawback of their very fast tempo is that the contrast in character of the lyrical second subject is virtually eliminated. I expect a degree of easing here but in this performance it is imperceptible. The viola melody sounds too hurried at their basic tempo. In such an intensely concentrated movement, I would suggest that contrast is even more essential than usual, otherwise the overall effect is relentless. One of Beethoven's hallmarks is his fondness for abrupt changes of character, but if that is what he intended here, it fails to register. The problem, it seems to me, is that having set such a fierce tempo, to then relax slightly for the second subject becomes more awkward to manage. The Hagens' solution is to press on, which sounds unnatural. Superficially this fiery approach is exciting, but is the sacrifice too great? I believe that most music can be played convincingly at a variety of tempos, but here we have a speed which is not so successful for the movement as a whole. The Allegretto, ma non troppo (one of those ambiguous tempo indications) could, or should, be bleaker and more melancholy, so I wonder if their choice of tempo and general fluency aren't a little too comfortable. Of course the playing is fabulous but austerity and a feeling of loneliness are played down. I have heard many performances which evoke a comfortless, if not chilling atmosphere, and I miss those qualities here. Again, the scherzo is magnificently played - taut and intense, but some quartets produce a more disturbing effect. Is this just too beautiful? Again I feel this may be a little too fast. A less brisk tempo would allow a more dogged, emphatic character, a little more edginess and intensity. Beethoven gave this work the subtitle Quartetto serioso. A less whirlwind approach to this piece would make more weight (= seriousness) possible. The introduction to the finale is brief but profound, but I feel the Hagens do not dig deeply enough. I hate to return to tempo yet again – it is far from being a hobby-horse of mine. Admittedly, Beethoven's marking is only Larghetto espressivo, but the result simply does not have enough emotional weight. I should say that I do not believe that music has to be played very slowly to be profound, as has been shown with the widespread practice of playing many “slow” movements in Baroque or Classical repertoire at more moderate tempos. The Allegretto agitato is too swift and once more there is a sacrifice in poignancy. Agitation may be equally well conveyed at a less urgent speed – at more of a true Allegretto. The coda is often criticised for its sudden breaking of the mood, for being light-hearted. Apparently Beethoven, when improvising, liked to move his listeners to the edge of tears, only to suddenly mock them - “You fools.” I seemed to remember this coda as a Presto, which is my impression from this performance. I checked and found Allegro in 2/2. In this performance of Opus 95 I think the Hagens have misjudged. As always, their playing and ensemble are exceptional, but this interpretation favours hectic brilliance over emotional weight.
The Schubert G major Quartet begins with a 20-minute Allegro molto moderato (- with the repeat, making it longer than the entire Beethoven Opus 95!), which the Hagens convincingly interpret as molto moderato, not allegro molto. Indeed there can be little argument that this is what Schubert meant. Nobody can suggest that there is any lack of weight in this performance, which I think is an almost entirely successful approach to one of his Schubert's greatest works. It is no less a quartetto serioso than Beethoven's Opus 95. To quibble, I would say that the dotted rhythm in the second subject is a little jaunty, except when the cello plays it. In my score there are staccato dots, but these are missing when the cello takes up the theme, so if this is authentic it explains why the Hagens play the way they do. Still, I can't help doubting, because the smoother version is more in the spirit of this essentially lyrical melody. The approach to, and arrival of, the greatly modified recapitulation is magical in this performance. In the slow movement, one of Schubert's characteristically slow marches tinged with melancholy, the Hagens are beautifully poised and understated. The fortissimo outbursts are powerfully done, but the shock-effect of the almost Bartókian cries (end of bar 52, forzando, and similar places) would be intensified if the following bar of tremolando were to be slightly delayed, rather than metronomically strict.
Dynamic contrasts are strong in the scherzo, which is superbly played, while the trio section is seductively beautiful but rather coy. Simplicity is preferable here. The finale is as demonic and obsessive as I have ever heard it, with dynamic contrasts as strong and disturbing as they should be. Equally those harsh elements which are so essential to late Schubert are not neglected. I have my doubts about their handling of the theme in broad notes, which sags a little. This seems laboured and slightly mannered – the only point which seems alien to the spirit of the movement. Otherwise this finale is played with the utmost brilliance, unanimity and attention to detail.
Overall, the Hagens' Schubert receives a very fine performance, whereas the Beethoven is a considerable disappointment.
Philip Borg-Wheeler
